CDP Climate Change 2017 Information Request W.W. Grainger, Inc. Module: Introduction Page: Introduction CC0.1 Introduction Please give a general description and introduction to your organization. W.W. Grainger, Inc., incorporated in the State of Illinois in 1928, is a broad-line distributor of maintenance, repair and operating (MRO) supplies and other related products and services used by businesses and institutions. Grainger uses a multichannel business model to provide customers with a range of options for finding and purchasing products, utilizing sales representatives, direct marketing materials, catalogs and ecommerce. Grainger serves more than 2 million customers worldwide through a network of highly integrated branches, distribution centers, websites and export services. CC0.2 Reporting Year Please state the start and end date of the year for which you are reporting data. The current reporting year is the latest/most recent 12-month period for which data is reported. Enter the dates of this year first. We request data for more than one reporting period for some emission accounting questions. Please provide data for the three years prior to the current reporting year if you have not provided this information before, or if this is the first time you have answered a CDP information request. (This does not apply if you have been offered and selected the option of answering the shorter questionnaire). If you are going to provide additional years of data, please give the dates of those reporting periods here. Work backwards from the most recent reporting year. Please enter dates in following format: day(dd)/month(mm)/year(yyyy) (i.e. 31/01/2001). Enter Periods that will be disclosed Fri 01 Jan 2016 - Sat 31 Dec 2016
CC0.3 Select country Country list configuration Please select the countries for which you will be supplying data. If you are responding to the Electric Utilities module, this selection will be carried forward to assist you in completing your response. CC0.4 Currency selection Please select the currency in which you would like to submit your response. All financial information contained in the response should be in this currency. USD($) CC0.6 Modules As part of the request for information on behalf of investors, companies in the electric utility sector, companies in the automobile and auto component manufacturing sector, companies in the oil and gas sector, companies in the information and communications technology sector (ICT) and companies in the food, beverage and tobacco sector (FBT) should complete supplementary questions in addition to the core questionnaire. If you are in these sector groupings, the corresponding sector modules will not appear among the options of question CC0.6 but will automatically appear in the ORS navigation bar when you save this page. If you want to query your classification, please email respond@cdp.net. If you have not been presented with a sector module that you consider would be appropriate for your company to answer, please select the module below in CC0.6.
Further Information Module: Management Page: CC1. Governance CC1.1 Where is the highest level of direct responsibility for climate change within your organization? Board or individual/sub-set of the Board or other committee appointed by the Board CC1.1a Please identify the position of the individual or name of the committee with this responsibility James T. Ryan, Board member and Chairman of the Board CC1.2 Do you provide incentives for the management of climate change issues, including the attainment of targets? Yes
CC1.2a Please provide further details on the incentives provided for the management of climate change issues Who is entitled to benefit from these incentives? The type of incentives Incentivized performance indicator All employees Monetary reward Energy reduction project Environment/Sustainability managers Monetary reward Emissions reduction target Comment Employees of Grainger s U.S. business are eligible for profit sharing based on the company's annual financial performance. Grainger s energy reduction and efficiency projects reduce the company s utility expenses, which make up about 1% of Grainger's total operating expenses in the U.S., and therefore do have some minimal effect on the monetary profit sharing award provided to employees. Managers receive annual salary increases based on the performance relative to their goals set each year. The Senior Manager of Global Sustainability has a goal to reduce Grainger's Carbon Intensity by 33% in 2020. This manager is rewarded based on this key performance indicator, Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions divided by total revenue of North American business operations. Further Information Page: CC2. Strategy CC2.1 Please select the option that best describes your risk management procedures with regard to climate change risks and opportunities Integrated into multi-disciplinary company- wide risk management processes
CC2.1a Please provide further details on your risk management procedures with regard to climate change risks and opportunities Frequency of monitoring Annually To whom are results reported? Geographical areas considered Board or individual/sub-set of the Board or committee appointed by the Board North America How far into the future are risks considered? Comment > 6 years N/A CC2.1b Please describe how your risk and opportunity identification processes are applied at both company and asset level i) Scope of the Process: Grainger's risk management process includes weather-related impacts and regulatory requirements related to climate change and climate change mitigation. ii) How risk/opportunities are assessed at a company level: Climate change topics are assessed at a GHG workshop once a year. Business partners from each area of the business that impacts Grainger s GHG inventory and climate change strategy discuss our progress and develop the plan for the future. Specific projects, company level risks, and company level opportunities are discussed. iii) How risks/opportunities are assessed at an asset level: Grainger conducted a Business Impact (BI) analysis to analyze risks and quantify major exposures to Grainger facilities within its supply chain. The outcomes include prioritization of key facilities or processes by quantifying the significant impact of exposures facing the organization against specific threats (e.g. physical risks/loss).
CC2.1c How do you prioritize the risks and opportunities identified? The process to identify priorities for physical risks is based upon locations that distribute the highest average monthly volume and the longest recovery period. The recovery period is defined as the time it would take to rebuild a large distribution center in the event of complete loss. CC2.1d Please explain why you do not have a process in place for assessing and managing risks and opportunities from climate change, and whether you plan to introduce such a process in future Main reason for not having a process Do you plan to introduce a process? Comment CC2.2 Is climate change integrated into your business strategy? Yes
CC2.2a Please describe the process of how climate change is integrated into your business strategy and any outcomes of this process i) Internal process for influencing the strategy/how the business strategy has been influenced: Grainger s climate change strategy has been influenced by a cross functional working group within the company. The team includes, but is not limited to the Corporate Social Responsibility team, community affairs, corporate facilities, environmental, health and safety, transportation, product management, legal and sustainability departments. The Sustainability department collects and monitors data around climate change on an ongoing basis to align current projects to the company s goal to reduce its GHG intensity. First, a project and it's benefits and impacts of a climate change strategy are presented by this team to leadership of the business unit to gain organizational alignment around investing in our climate change reduction strategy. Secondly, the business unit verifies the improvements. Then, the climate change mitigation project is either approved or denied based on the impact to climate change, and the financial value for the shareholders. One example of how this integrated internal process has shaped strategy for Grainger is the introduction of a GHG intensity reduction initiative to reduce intensity by 33%. A Second example is Grainger's efforts to increase recycling rates in our largest facilities which reduces GHG in our supply chain. Both examples provide a strategic advantage through cost reductions and efficiencies. ii) Substantial business decisions: Grainger's goal to reduce GHG emissions intensity by 2020 was a driver in the decision to make and upgrade to the building management systems in Grainger s Dallas distribution center location. Additionally, Grainger commenced work on a new solar photovoltaic project to increase renewable energy production at a distribution facility in 2016. iii) Aspects of Climate Change that influence long term strategy: The aspects of climate change that have influenced Grainger s long term strategy are opportunities and risks associated with rising greenhouse gas emissions and rising energy expenses, as well as opportunities to meet customer demand for greener products that help customers reduce environmental impacts and costs while adapting to climate change. Additionally, Grainger has adopted energy efficiency strategies to help improve Grainger s GHG intensity at its largest facilities to reach the reduction goal of 33% from 2011 to 2020. iv) Short-term strategy components (present to 1 year): The following are examples of how climate change has influenced Grainger s short-term business strategies. Grainger is increasing the importance of building energy efficient facilities. Grainger is committed to building LEED-certified facilities and is in the process of certifying a LEED facility in 2016: A potential LEED NC Gold distribution center in Bordentown, NJ. Additionally, Grainger is retrofitting its largest facilities with building management systems which reduce energy use by up to 15%. In 2016, Grainger completed a project for its Dallas distribution center. These strategies are currently active and all reduce energy consumption for the business, which affects Grainger's emissions intensity reduction goal. v) Long-term strategy components (More than one year): The following are examples of how climate change has influenced Grainger s long-term business strategies. Grainger is making renewable energy, energy efficiency, and green products a priority for the future. We have invested in clean energy (4.1 MW of solar capacity between two distribution centers in New Jersey and California), annually invest in energy efficiency projects (LED Lighting retrofits, retro-commissioning, etc.), manage midstream utility rebates for customers to install energy efficient lighting, and Grainger offers more than 70,000 environmentally preferred products. vi) Strategic Advantage: Grainger has a competitive edge because it has a robust energy efficient product offering, products such as efficient lighting, V-belts, energy efficient motors, and more. Additionally, Grainger set up processing utility rebates for the customer on energy efficient lighting. This combination of products and services increases Grainger's relevance to the customer aiding our ability to be the first choice provider for product and services in the MRO space. Also, reducing Grainger's energy use per square foot in our facilities reduces our expenses, allowing Grainger to create profits more efficiently.
CC2.2b Please explain why climate change is not integrated into your business strategy CC2.2c Does your company use an internal price on carbon? No, and we currently don't anticipate doing so in the next 2 years CC2.2d Please provide details and examples of how your company uses an internal price on carbon CC2.3 Do you engage in activities that could either directly or indirectly influence public policy on climate change through any of the following? (tick all that apply) Trade associations
CC2.3a On what issues have you been engaging directly with policy makers? Focus of legislation Corporate Position Details of engagement Proposed legislative solution CC2.3b Are you on the Board of any trade associations or provide funding beyond membership? No
CC2.3c Please enter the details of those trade associations that are likely to take a position on climate change legislation Trade association Is your position on climate change consistent with theirs? Please explain the trade association's position How have you, or are you attempting to, influence the position? CC2.3d Do you publicly disclose a list of all the research organizations that you fund? CC2.3e Please provide details of the other engagement activities that you undertake
CC2.3f What processes do you have in place to ensure that all of your direct and indirect activities that influence policy are consistent with your overall climate change strategy? Grainger belongs to a limited number of trade associations and participates in educational events held by these groups on sustainability topics. The company s process is to periodically review the trade associations sustainability materials and report our sustainability activities to these organizations. Grainger does not take part in influencing trade associations regarding climate change. CC2.3g Please explain why you do not engage with policy makers Further Information Page: CC3. Targets and Initiatives CC3.1 Did you have an emissions reduction or renewable energy consumption or production target that was active (ongoing or reached completion) in the reporting year? Intensity target
CC3.1a Please provide details of your absolute target ID Scope % of emissions in scope % reduction from base year Base year Base year emissions covered by target (metric tonnes CO2e) Target year Is this a science-based target? Comment
CC3.1b Please provide details of your intensity target ID Scope Int1 Scope 1+2 (market-based) % of emissions in scope 100% % reduction from base year 33% Metric Metric tonnes CO2e per unit revenue Base year 2011 Normalized base year emissions covered by target 142306 Target year 2020 Is this a science-based target? Comment No, and we do not anticipate setting one in the next 2 years CC3.1c Please also indicate what change in absolute emissions this intensity target reflects ID Direction of change anticipated in absolute Scope 1+2 emissions at target completion? % change anticipated in absolute Scope 1+2 emissions Direction of change anticipated in absolute Scope 3 emissions at target completion? % change anticipated in absolute Scope 3 emissions Comment Int1 Increase 21
CC3.1d Please provide details of your renewable energy consumption and/or production target ID Energy types covered by target Base year Base year energy for energy type covered (MWh) % renewable energy in base year Target year % renewable energy in target year Comment CC3.1e For all of your targets, please provide details on the progress made in the reporting year ID Int1 % complete (time) 67% % complete (emissions or renewable energy) 65% Comment
CC3.1f Please explain (i) why you do not have a target; and (ii) forecast how your emissions will change over the next five years CC3.2 Do you classify any of your existing goods and/or services as low carbon products or do they enable a third party to avoid GHG emissions? Yes CC3.2a Please provide details of your products and/or services that you classify as low carbon products or that enable a third party to avoid GHG emissions Level of aggregation Description of product/group of products Are you reporting low carbon product/s or avoided emissions? Taxonomy, project or methodology used to classify product/s as low carbon or to calculate avoided emissions % revenue from low carbon product/s in the reporting year % R&D in low carbon product/s in the reporting year Comment
CC3.3 Did you have emissions reduction initiatives that were active within the reporting year (this can include those in the planning and/or implementation phases) Yes CC3.3a Please identify the total number of projects at each stage of development, and for those in the implementation stages, the estimated CO2e savings Stage of development Under investigation To be implemented* Implementation commenced* Implemented* Not to be implemented Number of projects 0 0 1 8 0 Total estimated annual CO2e savings in metric tonnes CO2e (only for rows marked *) 0 0 2009 3054 0
CC3.3b For those initiatives implemented in the reporting year, please provide details in the table below Activity type Description of activity Estimated annual CO2e savings (metric tonnes CO2e) Scope Voluntary/ Mandatory Annual monetary savings (unit currency - as specified in CC0.4) Energy efficiency: Building services Installation of new Building Management System (Energy Management System) at the Dallas Distribution Center Scope 1 Energy efficiency: Building services Lighting retrofit of the existing parking lot lighting with new LED fixtures at the Grainger Lake Forest Headquarters Building Energy efficiency: Building services HVAC Replacements at (62) Branch Locations Energy efficiency: Processes Decommission of Branch Sites closed to the public and internal operations but still owned or leased. Energy efficiency: Building services Illinois Distribution Center Retrocommissioning Project Energy efficiency: Building services Lighting Retrofit of Existing HID Fixtures with new LED Lighting Fixtures at three (3) Grainger Branches. Energy efficiency: Processes Change in operations and decommissioning and consolidation of IT systems at Niles Data Center 482 58 280 973 416 45 715 85 Scope 2 (marketbased) Scope 1 Scope 2 (marketbased) Scope 1 Scope 2 (marketbased) Scope 1 Scope 2 (marketbased) Scope 1 Scope 2 (marketbased) Scope 2 (marketbased) Scope 2 (marketbased) Energy efficiency: Processes Operations transfer of NJDC to NEDC Scope 2 (marketbased) Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary 64995 5712 11444 195371 35982 7350 104000 24145
Investment required (unit currency - as specified in CC0.4) Payback period Estimated lifetime of the initiative Comment 412550 159900 865056 0 15300 33700 20000 0 4-10 years >25 years 21-25 years <1 year 1-3 years 1-3 years <1 year <1 year 21-30 years 21-30 years 11-15 years >30 years 6-10 years 21-30 years >30 years >30 years CC3.3c What methods do you use to drive investment in emissions reduction activities? Method Comment Dedicated budget for energy efficiency Each year Grainger dedicates a portion of its capital and expense budget toward energy efficiency projects within its real estate portfolio. CC3.3d If you do not have any emissions reduction initiatives, please explain why not
Further Information Page: CC4. Communication CC4.1 Have you published information about your organization s response to climate change and GHG emissions performance for this reporting year in places other than in your CDP response? If so, please attach the publication(s) Publication Status Page/Section reference In voluntary communications Complete 24-29 Attach the document https://www.cdp.net/sites/2017/61/22861/climate Change 2017/Shared Documents/Attachments/CC4.1/Grainger_2017_Corporate_Responsibility_Report.pdf Comment
Further Information Module: Risks and Opportunities Page: CC5. Climate Change Risks CC5.1 Have you identified any inherent climate change risks that have the potential to generate a substantive change in your business operations, revenue or expenditure? Tick all that apply Risks driven by changes in regulation Risks driven by changes in physical climate parameters Risks driven by changes in other climate-related developments
CC5.1a Please describe your inherent risks that are driven by changes in regulation Risk driver Description Potential impact Timeframe Direct/Indirect Likelihood Magnitude of impact Estimated financial implications Management method Cost of management Uncertainty surrounding new regulation Regulations directed towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions may increase utility costs. Examples of this include the Clean Air Act, and the subsequent EPA New Source Performance Standards for any new power plant in the US. Increased utility costs would increase operational costs for Grainger s facilities located in the United States. Increased operational cost >6 years Indirect (Supply chain) More likely than not Low Regulation of GHG emissions has the potential to impact utility costs. Changes in legal and regulatory environments could increase the cost of doing business. Utility costs may increase in the future, but it will have a relatively small financial impact. Grainger has calculated that if regulations were to affect utility costs 10% there would be an estimated increase in operating expense of 1%. Grainger is conducting energy efficiency upgrades in existing facilities and building new facilities to energy efficient standards. In 2016 Grainger operated 18 LEED facilities in the US, Canada, and Mexico. Additionally, in 2016, Grainger implemented 8 energy efficiency projects, including but not limited to lighting upgrades, which will reduce the facilities future energy requirements. The cost of these 8 energy efficiency/renewable energy projects totaled approximately $1.5M.
CC5.1b Please describe your inherent risks that are driven by changes in physical climate parameters Risk driver Description Potential impact Timeframe Direct/Indirect Likelihood Magnitude of impact Estimated financial implications Change in precipitation extremes and droughts Changes in precipitation extremes could cause flooding for respective Grainger locations considered to be in a 100 year flood zone. In the event of extreme flood conditions the respective location will be inoperable for an unknown period of time. In addition, there could be considerable damage to stocked inventory within a given location that can no longer be sold to customers. Inability to do business >6 years Direct About as likely as not Low Financial Impacts due to the loss of sales and loss of inventory. Increased severity of precipitation has the potential to increase this small financial impact. Grainger has calculated that complete loss a building in a flood/severe storm region would cost the business at least $50M and less than that in 99% of Grainger's buildings. Management method Cost of management This risk is mitigated by locating more than 97% of the Grainger locations outside of 100-year flood zones. This means roughly 3% of Grainger locations reside in a 100- year flood zone. Grainger has mitigated the risk of total loss by implementing contingency plans so that the remaining locations around the country are well positioned to serve affected communities and customers. This risk is evaluated when buildings are built or relocated. Additionally, in 2016, Grainger implemented upgrades to the buildings envelopes, including re-roofing, to protect from extreme weather. Grainger spent approximately $60M on maintenance to buildings and improvements to Grainger Properties and other critical assets in 2016.
CC5.1c Please describe your inherent risks that are driven by changes in other climate-related developments Risk driver Description Potential impact Timeframe Direct/Indirect Likelihood Magnitude of impact Estimated financial implications Changing consumer behavior Grainger sells environmentally preferred products, so we must maintain an environmentally responsible reputation or else we run the risk of reduced demand for our products. Grainger's continued success is substantially dependent on positive perceptions of Grainger's reputation. Reducing our GHG emissions intensity will support Grainger's continued success. Reduced demand for goods/services >6 years Direct About as likely as not Low-medium One of the reasons why customers choose to do business with Grainger and why employees choose Grainger as a place of employment is the reputation that Grainger has built over 85+ years. To be successful in the future, Grainger must continue to preserve, grow and leverage the value of its brand. Reputational value is based in large part on perceptions of subjective qualities. If Grainger s reputation was negatively impacted, it could lead to a reduction in customer demand which could negatively impact the company s revenue. The financial implication to a negative effect on Grainger's climate change reputation could be a decline in environmentally preferred product sales. If there was a 5% reduction in environmentally preferred product sales, it would result in a sales decline of approximately $28M. Management method Cost of management Grainger has implemented a Corporate Social Responsibility working group to focus on stakeholder views around its corporate citizenship and Grainger's business practices. The CSR group includes but is not limited to community affairs, environmental, legal, health and safety and sustainability functional areas who more specifically track trends around climate change. Grainger also takes the opportunity to further enhance its reputation by communicating a commitment to sustainability through the CDP. Also, in April of 2017, Grainger published its 5th annual CSR Report and throughout the year answered customer specific questionnaires. The incremental cost of these methods is $0. Grainger has approximately the equivalent of 5.5+ full time employees dedicated to corporate social responsibility.
CC5.1d Please explain why you do not consider your company to be exposed to inherent risks driven by changes in regulation that have the potential to generate a substantive change in your business operations, revenue or expenditure CC5.1e Please explain why you do not consider your company to be exposed to inherent risks driven by changes in physical climate parameters that have the potential to generate a substantive change in your business operations, revenue or expenditure CC5.1f Please explain why you do not consider your company to be exposed to inherent risks driven by changes in other climate-related developments that have the potential to generate a substantive change in your business operations, revenue or expenditure
Further Information Page: CC6. Climate Change Opportunities CC6.1 Have you identified any inherent climate change opportunities that have the potential to generate a substantive change in your business operations, revenue or expenditure? Tick all that apply Opportunities driven by changes in regulation Opportunities driven by changes in physical climate parameters Opportunities driven by changes in other climate-related developments
CC6.1a Please describe your inherent opportunities that are driven by changes in regulation Opportunity driver Description Potential impact Timeframe Direct/Indirect Likelihood Magnitude of impact Estimated financial implications Product labeling regulations and standards As emerging environmental product standards take effect, new, more sustainable products and services are available to the marketplace through Grainger's product assortment. This could lead to an increased demand for new, environmentally preferable and sustainable products. Product standards such as GREENGUARD GOLD, Green Seal Certified and Safer Choice are important certifications to offer customers who want to select green and sustainable choices in the products they are purchasing for their companies. Increased demand for existing products/services 1 to 3 years Direct Virtually certain Medium Grainger s dedication to managing and verifying products with green or sustainable certifications and attributes allows our customers to make an informed choice when selecting products. As our capabilities in this space become more sophisticated there is a potential for increased revenue from the Government and Healthcare sectors which increasingly demand a higher percentage of their purchased products to be certified green or sustainable. In a 2012 press release issued by Johnson & Johnson they referenced a 2012 study conducted by SK&A who surveyed key decision makers within Institutional Delivery Networks and hospitals on the importance of green/sustainability on their purchasing decisions. The survey found that nearly one-third of current requests for proposals for medical products include green attributes, while key decision makers expect nearly 40% of future requests for proposals to include green attributes. Management method Cost of management We continually receive requests from all segments of our customer base for green and sustainable product options. Grainger is making an increased effort to maintain product content by working closely with Underwriters Laboratories Environmental (ULE) to verify the claims made by our suppliers. Each product which is noted with a green or sustainable certification or attribute is reviewed and verified by ULE. Products that are verified are given a Green Leaf on Grainger.com while those that don t pass have the certification or attribute removed in our product content. Through our partnership with ULE we regularly update or revise the certification or attribute product information options for our suppliers. Because of the verification services which are performed by ULE we have engaged into a verification process contract with them in the amount not to exceed $33,375 depending on the amount of work which is performed by ULE in 2017.
CC6.1b Please describe your inherent opportunities that are driven by changes in physical climate parameters Opportunity driver Description Potential impact Timeframe Direct/ Indirect Likelihood Magnitude of impact Estimated financial implications Management method Cost of management Induced changes in natural resources As the leading distributor of facility maintenance products in North America, Grainger has a network of approximately 5,000 suppliers to assist in identifying and sourcing products that help businesses reduce the need of natural resources such as water, fuel, etc. Grainger offers over 1,600,000 stocked catalog products including over 70,000 products geared toward energy conservation, water conservation, green cleaning, indoor air quality and waste reduction. Grainger has an opportunity to provide environmentally preferable products to customers to help our them become more resilient in facing the impacts of climate change, like flooding, storms, drought or extreme temperature. Additionally, these products help minimize impact to the environment, this reduced impact will lessen the risks associated with changes in natural resources. As climate change may affect these, we believe there will be an increase in demand/sales of these green products. Increased demand for existing products/services 1 to 3 years Direct About as likely as not Medium Potential financial implications: Grainger sold over $556M in environmentally preferred products in 2016. The ability to service our customers, when presented a change in natural resource availability, helps them reduce or manage risks. If Grainger could increase sales of green products by 10% it could increase revenue by approximately $56M annually. Reducing the customer demand for natural resources also provides them the ability to reduce their operational expenses. This business is growing year over year. Additional financial implications could include a potential increase in sales volume for Grainger due to more product depth and breath available in the marketplace. The financial implications of this opportunity are currently a small portion of sales. In order to manage this opportunity, Grainger has implemented several category teams to address specific needs of customers. This includes energy reduction teams around lighting, marketing teams to communicate to customers, etc. One team did an expansion of its emergency preparedness and safety offering to make more products available on demand. To do this, the product managers identified products that would be in useful for emergency preparedness and safety. Additionally, Grainger implemented a sourcing effort around disease prevention, focusing on the safety equipment needed in case of a major outbreak. History has shown that in times of extreme weather conditions, or natural disasters, there is an increased risk of health epidemics. To combat this potential problem of increased risk caused by climate change, Grainger prepared by sourcing large quantities of hazmat suits, and other equipment for its customers. Because of advanced preparation, the incremental cost of these methods is $0. Grainger employs the equivalent of 1+ full time employees to market sustainability products, with support from over 90 full time employees dedicated to product management.
CC6.1c Please describe your inherent opportunities that are driven by changes in other climate-related developments Opportunity driver Description Potential impact Timeframe Direct/ Indirect Likelihood Magnitude of impact Estimated financial implications Management method Cost of management Reputation Grainger sells environmentally preferable products, so we must maintain an environmentally responsible reputation. We have the opportunity of increased demand for our products based on customer awareness of Grainger's sustainable product offering and reputation as a sustainable company. Grainger's continued success is substantially dependent on positive perceptions of Grainger's reputation. Increased stock price (market valuation) 1 to 3 years Direct About as likely as not Low Grainger has built its reputation over many years. To be successful in the future, Grainger must continue to preserve, grow and leverage the value of its brand. This reputational risk also provides Grainger the opportunity to expand its product and service offering, upgrade its facilities, and operate its business in a more sustainable manner. The financial implications of the green product sales growth exceed $556M in environmentally preferable product sales in 2016, a sector of the business that has typically grown year over year. If Grainger could increase sales of environmentally preferable products by 10% it would earn approximately $56M more annually. Additionally, Grainger has shown improvement year over year aligning itself as a sustainable company, reducing its risks of climate change, and increasing its efficiency. Because green product sales a growing business for Grainger and it is becoming more environmentally efficient, it will positively affect market valuation. Grainger's cross functional Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) team engages with stakeholders around our brand and reputation. The CSR group includes but is not limited to the investor relations, environmental, health and safety and sustainability functional areas. The sustainability team tracks trends around climate change and the opportunity to further enhance our reputation by communicating our commitment. Grainger's Sustainability team has implemented countless initiatives to reduce the company's impact on the environment, which also creates a positive corporate reputation. These programs include, but are not limited to, recycling standardization, renewable energy installations, and team member engagement workshops. Grainger also takes the opportunity to further enhance our reputation by communicating our commitment to sustainability through disclosure like the CDP, Grainger's Annual CSR Report and customer specific questionnaires. In 2017 Grainger released its 5th Annual CSR Report. The initial cost to invest in these initiatives ranges from $10K to $4M, from recycling bins to solar installation to reputation management. The incremental cost of these methods, after initial investment, ranges from $0-$20,000 maintenance costs. The incremental cost in communicating these initiatives is $0. CC6.1d
Please explain why you do not consider your company to be exposed to inherent opportunities driven by changes in regulation that have the potential to generate a substantive change in your business operations, revenue or expenditure CC6.1e Please explain why you do not consider your company to be exposed to inherent opportunities driven by changes in physical climate parameters that have the potential to generate a substantive change in your business operations, revenue or expenditure CC6.1f Please explain why you do not consider your company to be exposed to inherent opportunities driven by changes in other climate-related developments that have the potential to generate a substantive change in your business operations, revenue or expenditure Further Information Module: GHG Emissions Accounting, Energy and Fuel Use, and Trading
Page: CC7. Emissions Methodology CC7.1 Please provide your base year and base year emissions (Scopes 1 and 2) Scope Scope 1 Scope 2 (location-based) Scope 2 (market-based) Base year Base year emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) Sat 01 Jan 2011 - Sat 31 Dec 2011 Tue 06 Jun 2017 - Tue 06 Jun 2017 Sat 01 Jan 2011 - Sat 31 Dec 2011 40275 102031 CC7.2 Please give the name of the standard, protocol or methodology you have used to collect activity data and calculate Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions Please select the published methodologies that you use The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (Revised Edition) CC7.2a If you have selected "Other" in CC7.2 please provide details of the standard, protocol or methodology you have used to collect activity data and calculate Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions
CC7.3 Please give the source for the global warming potentials you have used Gas CO2 CH4 N2O Reference IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5-100 year) IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5-100 year) IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5-100 year) CC7.4 Please give the emissions factors you have applied and their origin; alternatively, please attach an Excel spreadsheet with this data at the bottom of this page Fuel/Material/Energy Emission Factor Unit Reference Further Information Attachments
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2017/61/22861/climate Change 2017/Shared Documents/Attachments/ClimateChange2017/CC7.EmissionsMethodology/Grainger - 2016 Emissions Factors.xlsx Page: CC8. Emissions Data - (1 Jan 2016-31 Dec 2016) CC8.1 Please select the boundary you are using for your Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas inventory Operational control CC8.2 Please provide your gross global Scope 1 emissions figures in metric tonnes CO2e 40883 CC8.3
Please describe your approach to reporting Scope 2 emissions Scope 2, location-based We are reporting a Scope 2, location-based figure Scope 2, market-based We are reporting a Scope 2, market-based figure Comment CC8.3a Please provide your gross global Scope 2 emissions figures in metric tonnes CO2e Scope 2, location-based 100352 Scope 2, market-based (if applicable) Comment 96180 CC8.4 Are there any sources (e.g. facilities, specific GHGs, activities, geographies, etc.) of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions that are within your selected reporting boundary which are not included in your disclosure? Yes
CC8.4a Please provide details of the sources of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions that are within your selected reporting boundary which are not included in your disclosure Source Relevance of Scope 1 emissions from this source Relevance of location-based Scope 2 emissions from this source Relevance of market-based Scope 2 emissions from this source (if applicable) Explain why the source is excluded Locations outside the US, Canada, Mexico, or Panama are not included. Emissions are relevant but not yet calculated Emissions are relevant but not yet calculated Emissions are relevant but not yet calculated Complete data is not yet available. The missing data is from non-north American Grainger facilities and newly acquired businesses. CC8.5 Please estimate the level of uncertainty of the total gross global Scope 1 and 2 emissions figures that you have supplied and specify the sources of uncertainty in your data gathering, handling and calculations Scope Scope 1 Scope 2 (location-based) Scope 2 (market-based) Uncertainty range More than 2% but less than or equal to 5% More than 2% but less than or equal to 5% More than 2% but less than or equal to 5% Main sources of uncertainty Data Management Data Management Data Management Please expand on the uncertainty in your data Since Grainger s GHG inventory is compiled from a number of data sources, there is the possibility of some human error in the data transfer process. Granger has put in place internal audits and data quality checks to mitigate this source of uncertainty. Since Grainger s GHG inventory is compiled from a number of data sources, there is the possibility of some human error in the data transfer process. Granger has put in place internal audits and data quality checks to mitigate this source of uncertainty. Since Grainger s GHG inventory is compiled from a number of data sources, there is the possibility of some human error in the data transfer process. Granger has put in place internal audits and data quality checks to mitigate this source of uncertainty.
CC8.6 Please indicate the verification/assurance status that applies to your reported Scope 1 emissions Third party verification or assurance process in place CC8.6a Please provide further details of the verification/assurance undertaken for your Scope 1 emissions, and attach the relevant statements Verification or assurance cycle in place Status in the current reporting year Type of verification or assurance Annual process Complete Limited assurance Attach the statement https://www.cdp.net/sites/2017/61/22861/climat e Change 2017/Shared Documents/Attachments/CC8.6a/Grainger 2016 GHG Verification statement.pdf Page/section reference 1-3 Relevant standard Proportion of reported Scope 1 emissions verified (%) ISO14064-3 100
CC8.6b Please provide further details of the regulatory regime to which you are complying that specifies the use of Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems (CEMS) Regulation % of emissions covered by the system Compliance period Evidence of submission CC8.7 Please indicate the verification/assurance status that applies to at least one of your reported Scope 2 emissions figures Third party verification or assurance process in place
CC8.7a Please provide further details of the verification/assurance undertaken for your location-based and/or market-based Scope 2 emissions, and attach the relevant statements Location-based or market-based figure? Location-based Market-based Verification or assurance cycle in place Annual process Annual process Status in the current reporting year Complete Complete Type of verification or assurance Limited assurance Limited assurance Attach the statement https://www.cdp.net/sites/2017/61/22861/climate Change 2017/Shared Documents/Attachments/CC8.7a/Grainger 2016 GHG Verification statement.pdf https://www.cdp.net/sites/2017/61/22861/climate Change 2017/Shared Documents/Attachments/CC8.7a/Grainger 2016 GHG Verification statement.pdf Page/Section reference 1-3 1-3 Relevant standard ISO14064-3 ISO14064-3 Proportion of reported Scope 2 emissions verified (%) 100 100 CC8.8 Please identify if any data points have been verified as part of the third party verification work undertaken, other than the verification of emissions figures reported in CC8.6, CC8.7 and CC14.2 Additional data points verified Comment No additional data verified
CC8.9 Are carbon dioxide emissions from biologically sequestered carbon relevant to your organization? No CC8.9a Please provide the emissions from biologically sequestered carbon relevant to your organization in metric tonnes CO2 Further Information Page: CC9. Scope 1 Emissions Breakdown - (1 Jan 2016-31 Dec 2016) CC9.1 Do you have Scope 1 emissions sources in more than one country? Yes CC9.1a Please break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by country/region Country/Region United States of America Canada Mexico Panama Scope 1 metric tonnes CO2e 29405 11478 0 0
CC9.2 Please indicate which other Scope 1 emissions breakdowns you are able to provide (tick all that apply) CC9.2a Please break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by business division Business division Scope 1 emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) CC9.2b Please break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by facility Facility Scope 1 emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) Latitude Longitude CC9.2c
Please break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by GHG type GHG type Scope 1 emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) CC9.2d Please break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by activity Activity Scope 1 emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) Further Information
Page: CC10. Scope 2 Emissions Breakdown - (1 Jan 2016-31 Dec 2016) CC10.1 Do you have Scope 2 emissions sources in more than one country? Yes CC10.1a Please break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions and energy consumption by country/region Country/Region United States of America Canada Mexico Panama Scope 2, location-based (metric tonnes CO2e) Scope 2, market-based (metric tonnes CO2e) Purchased and consumed electricity, heat, steam or cooling (MWh) 87920 7989 4141 302 83892 7845 4141 302 158925 24991 7527 846 Purchased and consumed low carbon electricity, heat, steam or cooling accounted in market-based approach (MWh) 5451 0 0 0 CC10.2
Please indicate which other Scope 2 emissions breakdowns you are able to provide (tick all that apply) CC10.2a Please break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions by business division Business division Scope 2, location-based (metric tonnes CO2e) Scope 2, market-based (metric tonnes CO2e) CC10.2b Please break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions by facility Facility Scope 2, location-based (metric tonnes CO2e) Scope 2, market-based (metric tonnes CO2e) CC10.2c
Please break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions by activity Activity Scope 2, location-based (metric tonnes CO2e) Scope 2, market-based (metric tonnes CO2e) Further Information Page: CC11. Energy CC11.1 What percentage of your total operational spend in the reporting year was on energy? More than 0% but less than or equal to 5% CC11.2 Please state how much heat, steam, and cooling in MWh your organization has purchased and consumed during the reporting year Energy type Heat Steam Cooling MWh 0 0 0 CC11.3
Please state how much fuel in MWh your organization has consumed (for energy purposes) during the reporting year 203903 CC11.3a Please complete the table by breaking down the total "Fuel" figure entered above by fuel type Fuels Natural gas Motor gasoline Jet gasoline Propane MWh 161867 32976 7453 1607 CC11.4 Please provide details of the electricity, heat, steam or cooling amounts that were accounted at a low carbon emission factor in the market-based Scope 2 figure reported in CC8.3a Basis for applying a low carbon emission factor MWh consumed associated with low carbon electricity, heat, steam or cooling Emissions factor (in units of metric tonnes CO2e per MWh) Comment Off-grid energy consumption from an on-site installation or through a direct line to an off-site generator owned by another company 5451 0 Grainger has 3MW solar array in New Jersey and a 1MW solar array in California. We have sold those RECs to help finance the projects, then repurchase US Green Power RECs.
CC11.5 Please report how much electricity you produce in MWh, and how much electricity you consume in MWh Total electricity consumed (MWh) Consumed electricity that is purchased (MWh) Total electricity produced (MWh) Total renewable electricity produced (MWh) 196894 191443 5451 5451 Consumed renewable electricity that is produced by company (MWh) 5451 Comment Further Information Page: CC12. Emissions Performance CC12.1 How do your gross global emissions (Scope 1 and 2 combined) for the reporting year compare to the previous year? Decreased
CC12.1a Please identify the reasons for any change in your gross global emissions (Scope 1 and 2 combined) and for each of them specify how your emissions compare to the previous year Reason Emissions value (percentage) Direction of change Please explain and include calculation Emissions reduction activities Divestment Acquisitions Mergers Change in output Change in methodology Change in boundary Change in physical operating conditions Unidentified 2.1 0.6 0.5 1.4 1.5 1.5 Decrease Decrease Decrease Decrease Decrease Decrease Grainger is constantly evaluating its assets to ensure the business can meet a growing customer demand. As a result of this growing demand on our facilities, Grainger invested approximately $1.5M on its branch, distribution center and administrative facilities on energy efficient projects and activities, such as the In 2016, more than 85 percent of Grainger's US orders were delivered directly to customers, which means less activity in the branches. Grainger restructured its standalone branch network in the U.S. from 411 branches in 2006 to 254 branches in 2016. Based on previous year usage this resulted in an absolute reduction of 933 MT of CO2e, or In 2016, Grainger updated the Scope 2 egrid Emissions Factors for the United States from egrid2012 (Year 2012 Data) to egrid2014 (Year 2014 Data). Based on the previous year usage this resulted in an absolute reduction of 738 MT of CO2e, or approximately 0.5% of Grainger GHG emissions in Over the past five years, order origination has shifted from branches and phones to digital channels such as Grainger.com. In response to this migration, Grainger has consolidated its 150 contact centers in the United States into three national contact centers and has also reduced its owned fleet mobile services and associated mileage driven. Based on the previous year usage this resulted in an Grainger has reviewed the categories in which emissions have decreased, and it is unknown why emissions decreased by 2,225 MTCO2e, or approximately 1.5% of 2015 emissions. There were decreases in Natural Gas consumption in the US and Canada which is most likely associated with warmer weather. Yet, this has not been confirmed. (2225 MTCO2e/148337 MTCO2e)*100 = 1.5 (Grainger's 2015 scope 1 and scope 2 Other Through 2016, Grainger had installed 4.1 MW of renewable energy on the rooftops of our DCs. In 2017, another rooftop solar panel will be installed and operating. In 2016, additional certified renewable energy credits were purchased in anticipation of the new renewable energy load to be implemented in 2017. Based on the previous year purchased, this resulted in an absolute reduction of 2,192 MT of